Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

I'll be on "The Conservative Hispanic" on KVCE Dallas at 10 this morning, ET.  Hear it at 1160 on your Dallas AM dial, or at KVCEradio.com on the internet.

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15,  2010

MEDIA NEWS, RIGHT AND LEFT – AT 7:48 P.M. ET:  Sarah Palin's new series premiered last night on TLC, and received the highest rating in the network's history, attracting some 4.6 million viewers.

It is not known whether Chris Matthews watched, or whether the tingle up his leg is reserved for Barack Obama.  The tingle does not show up on MRIs. 

I have to admit that I didn't have time to watch the show, but it is certainly a unique vehicle for a potential presidential candidate.  Then again, Ronald Reagan did "Death Valley Days" and "Bedtime for Bonzo."  I'll try to grab an episode.

Meanwhile, back in the lower 48 states, there is major trauma involving the left's favorite website, The Huff-and-Puff, or is it Huffington Post.  There is a charge, my friends, of plagiarism.  Against Arianna, that pristine political operator?  Why, they've got to be kidding.  From The Politico: 

Two Democratic consultants are accusing Arianna Huffington and her business partner of stealing their idea for the powerhouse liberal website Huffington Post.

Peter Daou and James Boyce charge that Huffington and partner Ken Lerer designed the website from a plan they had presented them, and in doing so, violated a handshake agreement to work together, according to a lawsuit to be filed in New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan.

The complaint is a direct challenge to the left’s most important media property from two stalwarts of the progressive movement. And it challenges Huffington’s own oft-told story of coming up with the idea in conversation with Lerer and other friends.

“Huffington has styled herself as a ‘new media’ maven and an expert on the effective deployment of news and celebrity on the Internet in the service of political ends,” says the complaint. “As will be shown at trial, Huffington’s and Lerer’s image with respect to the Huffington Post is founded on false impressions and inaccuracies: They presented the ‘new media’ ideas and plans of Peter Daou and James Boyce as their own in order to raise money for the website and enhance their image, and breached their promises to work with Peter and James to develop the site together.”

Arianna Huffington has reinvented herself so many times, she ought to patented.  Now she is charged with stealing her most visible creation.

Frankly, it sounds like a tough case to win.  First, ideas themselves are not copyrightable.  To win an infringement case like this, you have to prove that a detailed plan was presented to Huffington, and that all, or a convincing chunk of it was stolen, literally word for word.  Similarity doesn't go far in convincing courts.

The plaintiffs have a greater chance of winning a moral victory than a legal one, and you know how much moral victories are worth in the media world.  Arianna, not the plaintiffs, has the star power on the left, and the cash to go with it.

In Hollywood, plagiarism suits are rarely won because of the need for excruciating detail, and because juries tend to side with stars and studios. 

This isn't to say that the plaintiffs aren't right.  They may be entirely right.  Winning in court is another story. 

This will be a fascinating case to watch, though, but I don't think it will affect HP's operations. 

November 15, 2010      Permalink

SHULER TO OPPOSE PELOSI – AT 7:29 P.M. ET:  Moderate Democratic Congressman Heath Shuler of North Carolina is making it official, according to Fox News.  He will oppose Nancy Pelosi's bid to be House Minority Leader, now that she's losing the speakership.

We feel that this is a symbolic action, with little chance of success.  The Democratic House delegation is even more left wing now than before the recent election.  The liberals have the safe seats, especially those carved out for ethnic constituencies.  The moderates, representing the swing districts, which really decide the majority in the House, were wiped out.

The liberals would rather go down in flame sticking rigidly to their 1960s principles, than make reasonable compromises.  But at least Pelosi will get some opposition, reminding her that the whole country isn't San Francisco.

At the same time, formerly important filmmaker Michael Moore is urging President Obama and the Dems to go left because, according to Moore, that's really what the American people want.  Moore, who occasionally works, bases his argument on the very fact that the moderates got wiped out.  That means Americans rejected them in favor of liberals, Moore says.

Moore is not known to have a psychiatric record, but seems intent on establishing one.

November 15, 2010       Permalink 

ALREADY THE GOOD CHANGES – AT 9:15 A.M. ET:  A new Republican committee chairman, and a breath of fresh air.  From The Hill:

After a recess scare in which terrorists exposed a gaping homeland-security vulnerability, the ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee is planning to hold a hearing on security procedures for U.S.-bound cargo as one of his first moves if he becomes chairman of the panel next year, as he hopes.

Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.) told The Hill that when Republicans take control of the House next year, the Homeland Security panel will take a detailed look at the screening protocols the U.S. has in place for inbound cargo, in an attempt to eliminate weaknesses in the current system that could jeopardize national security. The move comes in the wake of the foiled package bombings two weeks ago.

"I intend to schedule a coordinated and detailed hearing on air cargo very early in the next Congress," said King, who added that Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) is still the chairman of the committee and in charge of its schedule.

King will make an excellent chairman.  He has never relented, in the time since the 9-11 attacks, in his concern for this nation's security.  I don't recall any contribution that Mr. Thompson has made.

We've been very lucky in thwarting terrorist attempts against the United States in recent years.  That luck won't last forever, and even greater vigilance is called for.

November 15, 2010       Permalink

SNIPPET OF THE DAY – AT 9:01 A.M. ET:

The club of private college and university presidents earning seven figures is getting less exclusive.  Thirty presidents received more than $1 million in pay and benefits in 2008, according to an analysis of federal tax forms by The Chronicle of Higher Education. More than 1 in 5 chief executives at the 448 institutions surveyed topped $600,000.

Now you know where the $42,000 a year in tuition and fees goes.  When will we learn that colleges are businesses?

November 15, 2010      Permalink

REVOLTING, UTTERLY REVOLTING – AT 8:47 A.M. ET:  Occasionally we read a story that reminds us of some things that need to be cleaned up in our society.  From a well-reported piece in The New York Times:

Large banks, hedge funds and private investors hungry for new and lucrative opportunities are bankrolling other people’s lawsuits, pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into medical malpractice claims, divorce battles and class actions against corporations — all in the hope of sharing in the potential winnings.

We used to invest in building industries and establishing medical practices...and we stayed out of the marital affairs of others.  Ah yes, I remember it well.

The loans are propelling large and prominent cases. Lenders including Counsel Financial, a Buffalo company financed by Citigroup, provided $35 million for the lawsuits brought by ground zero workers that were settled tentatively in June for $712.5 million. The lenders earned about $11 million.

This is just disgraceful.  We have become the lawsuit society, and now lawsuits are investment targets.  And we wonder why Americans are disgusted with Wall Street, the "investment community," and parts of the legal profession.  These practices overshadow the genuine good that is done by many, if not most, investment houses and attorneys. 

As the story points out, these new practices do have an up side – making it possible for more people to pursue just lawsuits.  But the practices also lead to inevitable abuses that drive costs up and produce unexpected shocks for plaintiffs:

But the review shows that borrowed money also is fueling abuses, including cases initiated and controlled by investors. A Florida judge in December ordered an investment banker who orchestrated a shareholder lawsuit against Fresh Del Monte Produce to repay the company’s legal expenses, ruling that the case should not have reached trial.

Such financing also drains money from plaintiffs. Interest rates on lawsuit loans generally exceed 15 percent a year, and most states allow lawyers that borrow to bill clients for the interest payments. The cost can exceed the benefits of winning. A woman injured in a 1995 car accident outside Philadelphia borrowed money for a suit, as did her lawyer. By the time she won $169,125 in 2003, the lenders were owed $221,000.

It's time for responsible bar associations to intervene.

November 15, 2010      Permalink

OH, I'M SO GLAD ONE OF OUR GUYS SAID IT – AT 8:31 A.M. ET:  Hugh Hewitt, a conservative commentator and law teacher, is on the case - trying to nip in the bud a bad idea.  He is the only pundit who recognized the danger this quickly.  From The Washington Examiner:

With all due respect to Nancy Reagan, her proposal that the first Republican debate of the 2012 season be held at the Reagan Library in the spring of 2011 is worse than a nonstarter. The country needs to focus on the hugely important congressional debates this spring, not on made-for-MSM, liberal-dominated GOP wrestling matches.

The idea is itself an insult to conservative activists and new media. A quick rejection by GOP candidates of the presumptuous declaration of inevitability by Politico.com and NBC that they would be in charge would go a long way toward recognizing that these outlets, like most of the Beltway-Manhattan media elite, went in the tank for President Obama in 2008 and won't be allowed to dictate the terms of the 2012 presidential race.

Yay, team.  That says it.

...both outlets are significantly biased to the left, and not just to the president, but to the whole Beltway culture which is inherently big-government oriented and dominated by the conventional big-government wisdom about every debate. Very few Beltway media voices retain any connection to the conservative grass roots or the GOP's base, and those that do don't work at Politico or NBC.

In fact, those journalists never appear at these debates, which are instead given over to lefties like the affable Anderson Cooper, the professional but still MSM-driven Wolf Blitzer, the amiable Brian Williams or the talented-but-still-Beltway-driven John Harris or Jim Lehrer.

Can we be honest? They are all liberals. All of them. Not one of the questioners that could or would be proposed by Politico or NBC would be remotely in touch with the cares, concerns, and passions of the GOP's primary electorate. The process of choosing a GOP nominee should not be mediated by the left-wing media -- again.

Hewett has set the terms of a discussion that we, as a nation, need to have:  Who runs presidential debates?  Who chooses the questioners?  Why are there rarely any representatives of new, more conservative media?  Why do all the questioners work for large news organizations inside the beltway?

"Meet the Press," when it was run by the late Lawrence Spivack, often had reporters from small newspapers, even though they might have been assigned to Washington.  That's a good place to begin.  Then go through the staff roster of, say, National Review or The Weekly Standard.

November 15, 2010      Permalink

Y'THINK? – AT 8:10 A.M. ET:  It must've taken a headline writer at The Politico half a day to come up with something this penetrating, this revealing:

Low youth turnout likely hurt Democrats in the midterms

Yeah, guys, I think we could figure that out on our own.  And that fact reminds us of one of the most basic rules in American politics:  Never depend on the youth vote.  Kids are, well, kids.  They're immature and unreliable.  They go for fads, for the trends of the moment.  They haven't yet shouldered the responsibilities that makes real adults more careful voters.

In college towns from Durham, N.H., to Charlottesville, Va., and in university precincts as varied as Columbus, Ohio, and Syracuse, N.Y., a lack of campus enthusiasm appears to have contributed to the downfall of a group of House freshmen who rode into office in 2008 on Barack Obama’s popularity with students.

Consider Ohio: Two years ago, Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy rode the Obama campus wave to win the Columbus-based 15th District by 2,300 votes, ending more than 40 years of Republican control of the seat.

This year, however, Steve Stivers, the Republican she narrowly beat in 2008, trounced her by nearly 14 percentage points — about 30,000 votes.

The showing at the polls near Ohio State University was anemic.

Let's hear it for the stay-at-homes.  I don't want this country's future being decided by college students, although I'd probably trust them more than their professors. 

As for Mary Jo Kilroy, she is one of the most extreme of the leftist Dems elected in 2008.  It's encouraging to see her returned to the private sector, where she can become a community organizer.  Very trendy, you know.

November 15, 2010     Permalink

SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 14,  2010

ONE-TERM WONDER? – AT 11:39 P.M. ET:  I just wanted to call your attention to one of the most talked about columns since the election.  Patrick Caddell and Doug Schoen are long-time Democratic operatives, although they're not close to the Obama administration.

They're now proposing that Obama salvage his presidency by announcing that he will not run for another term, allowing him to become the "above partisanship" president he pledged to be.  From their column in the Washington Post, but published in a number of other places as well:

This is a critical moment for the country. From the faltering economy to the burdensome deficit to our foreign policy struggles, America is suffering a widespread sense of crisis and anxiety about the future. Under these circumstances, Obama has the opportunity to seize the high ground and the imagination of the nation once again, and to galvanize the public for the hard decisions that must be made. The only way he can do so, though, is by putting national interests ahead of personal or political ones.

To that end, we believe Obama should announce immediately that he will not be a candidate for reelection in 2012.

If the president goes down the reelection road, we are guaranteed two years of political gridlock at a time when we can ill afford it. But by explicitly saying he will be a one-term president, Obama can deliver on his central campaign promise of 2008, draining the poison from our culture of polarization and ending the resentment and division that have eroded our national identity and common purpose.

COMMENT:  An interesting argument, but I can't imagine it happening.  Obama's oversized ego essentially rules it out.  If he decides not to run, it would be after all the evidence available proved to him that he could not win, and he would wait until the last practical moment, sometime early in 2012, to decide.

But the fact that well-known Democratic figures are offering such grim advice speaks to Obama's weakened position.  He came in as the savior of the nation.  Now he's a guy who probably couldn't get Congress to agree to a color change on Washington street signs.

The column is fascinating.

November 14, 2010      Permalink

BULLETIN – OBAMA CONFIRMS IT – AT 7:49 P.M. ET:  Major news from The Politico:

MINNEAPOLIS - President Obama offered a lesson for Republicans that he learned the hard way during his first two years in office.

"Campaigning is different than governing," Obama told reporters Sunday when asked about his meeting with GOP leaders later this week.

COMMENT:  Well, I'm relieved that he confirmed that.  There'd been rumors that he'd state publicly that campaigning was the same as governing, but apparently his advisers talked him out of it.  Also, it is rumored that the president spent an entire week contemplating the nature of campaigning as opposed to the nature of governing.  He supposedly called major religious and moral leaders to get their input. 

So, now it's settled.  Campaigning is different from governing.  I'm just so glad we have a president who has the intellect, the courage, the independence, to come to that conclusion. 

Next week the president tackles the question, "Can a political figure be considered a god?"  Many of us refuse to return to serious commentary until the question is settled.

November 14, 2010      Permalink

WHY WE LOVE HIM – AT 9:47 A.M. ET:  Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey has emerged as one of the great new governors, getting the job done, and with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer.  From NRO: 

“Let me help you pack.” That’s what Gov. Chris Christie told one of the state’s top administrators when that administrator commented publicly that he could leave New Jersey and go to another state if his $242,000 total compensation were to be capped under the governor’s proposed rule.

Earlier in the day Christie discussed the Parsippany Board and Seitz at a town hall meeting in Toms River. “Let me tell you about the new poster boy for all that’s wrong with the public school system that is being dictated by greed,” the governor told the audience. “This contract is the definition of greed and arrogance. I’m going to be speaking out loudly and clearly every day I can about Lee Seitz. If Lee Seitz wants to try to put his greed and his arrogance ahead of the taxpayers of New Jersey, you elected me to stand up to people like Lee Seitz and others across the state and I will.”..

...The governor reacted to Seitz’s veiled threats to leave New Jersey and go to a nearby state where there is no state salary. “I will say in response to Mr. Seitz, ‘Let me help you pack.’ We have real problems in our state that we have to fix and we don’t have the time, nor the money, nor the patience any longer for people who put themselves before our citizens,” Christie railed.

COMMENT:  Christie is increasingly being mentioned as a possible candidate for president, although he vehemently rejects the idea.  Well, he rejects it today.  He certainly doesn't look like a president.  He's obese.  And he doesn't act like a president.  No "presidential" style.  And he doesn't talk like a president.  Foreign leaders would engage in their collective wince, once reserved for Dubya.

But Christie has, thus far, been incredibly effective in trying to right New Jersey's listing ship.  Like Obama, he inherited a bad situation.  Unlike Obama, he decided to do something about it that actually worked.

The jury, of course, is still out.  Christie has only been governor for less than a year.  But if things work out, and his spirit continues, watch him.  He is a sharp contrast with all the other candidates currently being mentioned, and that may just be what we need.

November 14, 2010       Permalink

DUBYA'S BACK IN TOWN – AT 9:19 A.M. ET:  Toby Harnden, of London's Telegraph, one of the most astute observers of American politics, notes the reemergence of George W. Bush, and the contrast with Barack Hussein Obama Jr.: 

Say what you like about former President George W. Bush, but his sense of timing is impeccable. Just after his successor Barack Obama took a self-described "shellacking" at the polls, Dubya was back, mocking the current occupant of the White House by his very presence...

...Who would have thought that the man hailed as a great American orator and whose stage at the 2008 Democratic convention was a faux Greek temple would be shown up in terms of the theatricality and articulation of the presidency by the man derided as a tongue-tied bumbler and global village idiot?..

...Looking at the 43rd and 44th American presidents right now, it is worth reflecting that it was only the unpopularity of Bush and all he represented that enabled someone as inexperienced and unproven as Obama to ascend to power.

By the same token, perhaps only a performance in office as myopic, self-absorbed and hubristic as that of Obama could have brought about a Bush rehabilitation so swiftly.

In two years, American voters might well decide that having lurched from Bush to Obama the time has come to choose a new president with a character and approach somewhere in between.

COMMENT:  The greatest resurrection of a former president was Harry Truman, who was practically ridden out of town on a rail after being succeeded by Dwight D. Eisenhower in January of 1953, but lived to see himself regarded as a great or near-great president.

Presidents aren't always, however, resurrected.  Jimmah Carter may have impressed the Nobel Prize committee, but no one looks back on his presidency with great admiration.  I suspect the same will be true of Obama.

As usual, the British reporters "got" Obama first.

November 14, 2010      Permalink

ALASKA UPDATE – AT 8:58 A.M. ET:  From The Politico:

With the majority of write-in ballots opened and counted, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski appeared Saturday to be on track to win reelection over Republican Joe Miller.

Murkowski has won 89.5 percent of the write-in ballots outright, plus another 8 percent that were challenged but counted for the senator anyway. The fate of those challenged ballots will be decided in the coming weeks pending court orders.

COMMENT:  Unless there's a miracle for Joe Miller, Murkowski will be back in the Senate, where she'll caucus with the Republican Party, which denied her renomination.

Joe Miller, who on paper was a fine candidate, in the real world was not.  After winning the primary he threw away the election to Murkowski, who ran what will probably be only the second successful write-in candidacy for the U.S. Senate in American history.

It is time to contemplate thoughtfully the quality of some of the candidates the Republicans, especially the tea partiers, placed before the voters in Senate races.  Sharron Angle, Christine O'Donnell, Ken Buck, Joe Miller.  These were all winnable races.  Proper vetting of candidates, and good campaign strategies, are critical keys to victory.  You can't just run someone is "right" on the ideology, but lacks almost everything else.  Losing is very boring.

November 14, 2010     Permalink